What planet are you guys from? Seriously, after years of dating I don't even begin to have a clue into how you guys work.

I was dating this guy I met on eharmony. Things were going well. We got along great. Come home to an e-mail today informing that he doesn't think we're compatible. I'm like, what? So I told him it was tacky to do this by e-mail.

So he gives me a call and tells me that our "core values" are different because I said something about worrying that I didn't have enough patience.

I wish I had mafia ties so I could get him beat up. Seriously, that's what that deserves IMHO.

And he's a good church going guy. Not Orthodox but there are no Orthodox single men. He's Roman Catholic. Goes go Mass every sunday. Prays in church every morning. One would think he wouldn't be an idiot. But apparently one would be wrong.

But this is typical male behavior. For example, I met one Orthodox guy on eharmony (one out of thousands of guys on-line was Orthodox). We e-mailed then chatted on the phone. Things were going well. He asked if we could met in person and I said yes. He said he'd call and we'd make plans. Did he ever call? Of course not!

So a message to all of the guys out there...don't be big jerks. Don't just not call. Don't just decide to break things off for no reason.

You are a very judgmental and bitter person. (And if it "takes one to know one," then I know both of those attributes very well.) Grow up. That's the solution to your problem. Gee, a pious Catholic doesn't want anything to do with you, I wonder why. It couldn't POSSIBLY be you!!!

You are a very judgmental and bitter person. (And if it "takes one to know one," then I know both of those attributes very well.) Grow up. That's the solution to your problem. Gee, a pious Catholic doesn't want anything to do with you, I wonder why. It couldn't POSSIBLY be you!!!

I've tried so hard over the last nine months or so correct a lot of my faults. I thought I'd been doing better. But I guess I've been deluing myself. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried to become different than my "essential core."

This is pretty darn cruel response. I suppose others agree.

You know, you think life is going okay and then something or someone comes along to kick you in the teeth.

You know, you don't know anything about my life. You don't know what I've been through. If you saw me on the street, you wouldn't know me from Adam. But yet you feel free to kick me in the teeth. And I suppose I deserve it because of my fundamentally "bitter" "judgmental" nature.

Perhaps Paradosis was reacting to the fact that you lump all men together: "all of the guys out there....don't be big jerks"....I think that most men are sick and tired of such portrayals in the media. Believe it or not, there are men out there who regularly place themselves in harms way for the sake of women and children. Perhaps if you don't tar all men with the same brush.....you will attract more fly's with honey than with vinegar.

« Last Edit: July 24, 2005, 05:59:44 PM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

I lump all men together because that's been my experience with men. Maybe there are a few decent ones of you out there. I only speak from my experience. And in my experience it doesn't matter whether they're good church-going guys or partying every night guys, they all hurt women.

Now maybe it's my fault. Maybe I deserve it.

And I'm willing to bet that with a mouth like that, Paradosis has hurt his share of women.

But I supose I should "grow up" and give up on the hope of finding someone. I put myself out there and I only get my teeth kicked in. And people wonder why I'm bitter.

A real Godly man, like a real Godly woman, is hard to find. But its worth the digging. I know. I just found my soul mate, or Anam Cara as the Irish say. And you have to dig through alot of dirt to find them. Trust God on this one. Let him lead you, and soon you'll have what you want in all things. Including a man. Pray hard. And focus on God rather than all else. He will not lead you astray.

A real Godly man, like a real Godly woman, is hard to find. But its worth the digging. I know. I just found my soul mate, or Anam Cara as the Irish say. And you have to dig through alot of dirt to find them. Trust God on this one. Let him lead you, and soon you'll have what you want in all things. Including a man. Pray hard. And focus on God rather than all else. He will not lead you astray.

Peace.

Ian Lazarus

I don't believe this anymore. I think that this might have been it for me. I hardly had any faith in men left and I think the last little bit is now gone.

But I supose I should "grow up" and give up on the hope of finding someone.

This is just more extremism......People meet and fall in love all the time- you have no special forcefield around you placed there by a gypsie curse which is stopping this from happening to you. The only person who can stop it happening to you, is you.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

I know of only one man that was perfect, and we killed Him as best we could. But I feel your pain, I really do. I can't find a women. Every time I think I've found someone, she starts treating me like crap.

If God can save us beyond all hope, than a man is easy. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š But it takes trust. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And your untrust, dear sisiter, may be the reason why. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Dont say you no longer believe...in anything. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š If we believe that all things are possible with God, than it will happen. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Find your faith. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Rededicate yourself. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š if you cant trust in God, thant you wont ever have a menaingful relationship with anyone. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And that is like heaven and hell :We go to heaven together, we go to hell of our own choosing and by ourselves. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Reconsider. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And look to God FIRST. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Prayers for you, sister.

If God can save us beyond all hope, than a man is easy. But it takes trust. And your untrust, dear sisiter, may be the reason why. Dont say you no longer believe...in anything. If we believe that all things are possible with God, than it will happen. Find your faith. Rededicate yourself. if you cant trust in God, thant you wont ever have a menaingful relationship with anyone. And that is like heaven and hell :We go to heaven together, we go to hell of our own choosing and by ourselves. Reconsider. And look to God FIRST. Prayers for you, sister.

Ian Lazarus

Why exactly would I have trust in men? You put yourself out there, like I did with this thread, and someone like Paradosis comes along to kick you in the teeth. That is what people do.

Trust is stupid.

The guy before this last one talked to me on the phone a few times. It went well and he asked to meet me in person. I said yes and he said he'd call the next week. Never called. He'd seen my picture before he started talking so I can't imagine what changed. I sent him a "what's up?" e-mail and the jerk didn't even respond. I could have understood if he'd decided he didn't want to see me but for goodness' sakes tell me. Don't just disappear off the face of the earth!

So a message to you decent guys out there, get your brothers in line.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

Well. That's a problem because guys could give a crap what other guys do. We don't talk about it. There is no "brotherhood" like there is (supposedly) a "sisterhood".

When you get down to it -- we think most other guys are jerks too!ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

And I will explain guys to you: They are in it for the sex - initially. if you don't appeal to them at that level then they really aren't interested. They will try to be interested - but eventually they just can't deal and will just fade away.

I figured it was all about sex. Even in the goody-goody churchy guys. They always see my picture before they meet me so I guess I meet their "criteria," i.e. pretty enough, etc.

I guess why I'm so angry about this particular instance is that I don't understand it. We went out twice and had a great time both times. We talked for hours. He kissed me at the end of our date on friday and asked me out again. Then the very next day he descides that we're not compatible. He doesn't have the guts to tell me in person so sends me an e-mail. I told him I was hurt that he did it through e-mail because I thought something like this should be said in person.

He called me this afternoon and explained that we don't share "core values" because I said something about working very hard to have patience with people who don't understand things as quickly as I do.

I guess everyone here thinks I'm a psycho-witch who deserves what she gets because she's so "bitter" and "judgmental" but it's the same old thing, in real life I'm not at all like I am on-line.

It's for the best because obviously he's an idiot. What kind of a person breaks off a relationship with someone they really get along with just because of one little statement. He seemed like a great guy and I wondered why he was still single at 40 and now I know. He's still single because he expects to marry himself.

I do apologize if I really, truly hurt you Jennifer. I thought you went a bit overboard (like the mafia comment ), so I did the same.

I went overboard because my feelings were hurt. And, btw, in the old country men knew that they had to be careful because a girl's father and brothers would beat them up if they went too far. Truthfully I think a lot of guys could do a beating or two. Beat some sense into them.

Okay, sorry everyone for dragging down into my mixed up life. I should have just called a friend or two and cried it out but I didn't want to cry so this was the outlet. I knew that if I got someone in person, I'd lose it.

All of this is just more proof about the fallen nature of man. There's so much pain in the world. This guy hurt me because he's overly sensitive because his last girlfriend hurt him. It's an endless cycle of pain. I suppose all of us should make an effort to try to put a stop to the cycle. I shouldn't lecture about that because I've hurt my share of guys too.

We're all so fragile when it comes to human relationships that we're so easily hurt and in turn we hurt others because we're afraid of being hurt again.

Jen,You've been a lot calmer than I would've expected. ITSM that the majority of women are far more vindictive. Yeah, this guy was a dork, had a wishy-washy excuse. He probably was intimdated by you, wants someone more compliant and had to have an excuse. For me, I've gone out a few times with another Orthodox woman (I think about your age). We've had some pseudo-romantic moments (no kissing yet), but she seems to not be able to make up her mind with her life. I've talked to her a few times since the last time I saw her, but my priest (who has met her) thinks she's too much in her head, which I reluctantly agree. Anyways, I'd say that guys are cowards when it comes to communication - it's uncomfortable for us. Look at this latest circumstance (the dumping by e-mail then phone call) as his loss.

I just read this whole thread and it is not just a problem that you have. I have been through several similar situations. Friday night I was actually asking myself what is wrong with me, why can't I get a girl? It hurts, I think everyone on here knows that feeling. Something I was telling myself, those girls weren't right because they can't reconize a great guy. Keep your head up!

Ohh and if you are near Indianapolis for the next month give me a buzz I will go out with you.

Revisiting the 'men make no sense to me' topic with an update...this guy, who all of the sudden decided that we weren't compatible (the day after kissing me), wants to see me again. He's been e-mailing me for a week trying to set up a time to meet. I come home from work today to a voicemail from him left during the day. He said that he knew I'd be at work but he wanted to leave me a "surprise" voicemail and he hopes I'm doing well and he can't wait to see me.

Can one of you men please decipher this behavior for me? I don't get it at all. Why would he call me during the day when he knew I wasn't there?

It is amazing that any couples hook up at all given the fact that we obviously make no sense to each other.

Don’t make it easy for him. He seems unstable, and potentially likely to end up hurting you again. If you really like this guy and want to take this opportunity, don’t show it; let it be known that you are not impressed by his games, and that you have no time for it, nor can you really be bothered. If he is serious about you, and does a good suck up job, and justifies himself convincingly, proving that he is mature and serious about this, then give him a chance I’d say.

Quote

Can one of you men please decipher this behavior for me? I don't get it at all. Why would he call me during the day when he knew I wasn't there?

Well putting this incident together with the fact he broke up with you via email, I would say that this guy just can’t face reality, and so he takes the easy way out by relaying his rejection of you and subsequent desire to see you again via impersonal forms (email and phone message). He broke up with you in email, because that way he wouldn’t be put on the spot with all sorts of questions regarding his intentions and reasons which may stump him or make him look bad. Likewise, he doesn’t want to face direct rejection from you to again be put on the spot, so he didn’t call you at a time at which you could say no to him live such that he would have to respond somehow and someway. If you ask me, I’d say there’s slight hints of cowardice and selfishness in his behaviour.

Peace.

Logged

No longer an active member of this forum. Sincerest apologies to anyone who has taken offence to anything posted in youthful ignorance or negligence prior to my leaving this forum - October, 2012.

"Philosophy is the imitation by a man of what is better, according to what is possible" - St Severus

Let's see if we have the story basically straight: you go out with a guy on two dates, and after you two share a kiss and things seem to be proceeding nicely, he weasels out by breaking up with you by e-mail and by voice messaging. Then, after about a week or two of being free, he starts to call you back...

There's several potentials, but I'm willing to bet that his sudden absence was because he had something set up with another woman. Maybe this was a past girlfriend or someone else he had his eye on for a while and suddenly he had his chance. Anyway, I am thinking that he found his entanglement with you inconvenient and so needed to rid himself of this inconvenience. He chose to break up impersonally since he knew his eyes may betray the real reason---there was nothing wrong with the relationship per se, it's just that he needed some freedom right then.

However, things did not go as he wished, and this woman he was pursuing either told him to take a hike or otherwise things didn't work out (perhaps she even came into town for a week or two and then left, leaving him without a significant other again....). He then thought he'd give faithful and dependable Jennifer a call to see if she might go out with him again....

So, it's up to you...I definately would need to have an explanation from him regarding what happened recently. OTOH, it's only been two dates, so there is no deep commitment here beyond a thought that you'd see each other again.... but still, I'd want to know more of his dating history and find a friend of his and quiz the friend regarding what this guy was doing for that period of missing time. And I'd want to know these things before my heart starts to obscure what my head is saying...

So, maybe I'm paranoid, but I've been a guy all of my life, and when guys dump someone to go back to them quickly it's usually because they wanted to go out with someone else and things don't work out, or they actually are commitment-phobic and you don't want them anyway because of that factor.

Anyway, please don't forget to pray and also talk about this with your Spiritual Father (thanks to EA for that bit of advice I forgot to mention when advising another young lady).

Logged

"As the sparrow flees from a hawk, so the man seeking humility flees from an argument". St John Climacus

I ran this story by some girlfriends and we're all mystified...but then we're usually mystified by the things men do.

My theory is that he really liked spending time with the me but he's commitmentphobic. So he wants to have his cake and eat it too...i.e. get to spend time with me without the commitment.

He's definitely got issues...but then so do we all.

My plan (and it's a bit fiendish) is to see him as a 'friend,' act all casual and non-chalant, etc. but mention other men and wear 'cleavagy' blouses...i.e. "they're real and they're spectacular" but "friends" don't get to see them...

My reaction to all this is a bit 'scary' but I'm genuinely surprised that a guy who looked so nice and normal on the surface could be so 'troubled.' He looks like a mature man. Has a good job, comes from a good family, goes to Mass, etc., so I'm surprised that he'd act just like the jerk frat boys I dated in college.

Can one of you men please decipher this behavior for me?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I don't get it at all.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Why would he call me during the day when he knew I wasn't there?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

You are "the fall-back". He couldn't find anyone esle.

Re: Calling you when he knows that you are not home - simple -- he will not be rejected "in-person". Also, he figures this way if you call him back - he knows that you will put up wth this way of him treating you.

Since you guys have done a good job deciphering this guy's behavior, what about a friend of mine's situation? She's been dating this guy for about 9 months. They've had sex and been on several trips together. She's met his family and friends. But he hasn't yet told her that he loves her and has said nothing about marriage.

Just like 'my' guy, he's a god guy. From a good family, good job, goes to Mass every sunday.

Seriously, why would someone date another person for 9 months and not be serious about them? Is it the sex? Please tell me it's not that simple. Is the old saying "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free" true? My mom says that back in her day (late 1950's) nice girls didn't sleep with guys. The guys knew that if they wanted to have sex they had to get married. Although according to my mom, premarital sex was more common than we'd imagine. Girls would sleep with guys, knowing that if they got pregnant, the guy would definitely marry them.

A good Catholic having premarital sex? Now, I must confess that I am not be best friend of the Latins (but not their worst enemy either), but they generally have better moral values than that, at times I think they even go too far (e.g. Birth Control).

But concerning the details of the situation, I would assume that, yes, it is just for the sex...as a biological imperative sex seems to often take precedence over cultural, ethical, and moral values.

(But, then again, ultimately the entire point of this endeavour (from a biological standpoint) is procreation, sexual reproduction allows for more selection, and hence a greater chance of survival, all these customs, emotions, and other elements of human relationships are, more likely than not, simply methods developed to ensure the greatest possible chance for the offspring to survive, adapt, and prosper in the world.)

Now whether the man in question even realizes this, much less concerning what should be done about the situation, perhaps someone else here could be of more use than I. Yeast I can understand, but the human being is a slightly more complex organism and I lack any advanced degrees in psychology (we can't know everything, even if we can pretend like we do ); though my hypothesis is that behind all the complexities in our methods, we still operate surprisingly similar to the above referenced yeast.

Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry

Being almost a year now removed from the high school scene (where I think the concept of sex without any commitment is universal) it has been sad to observe many friends deal with this. And while your problems point to men being complete losers, it is not just the men. It is part of being in a society that is continually falling further away from the Gospel. I can't offer any advice as to where or how to find better guys - only prayer and trusting that God will show His will for you.

Also a good read on the topic is the then Karol Wojtyla's Love and Responsibility.

Forgive me, but I think that this thread has sexist overtones.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š There's a lot of man-bashing going on here, and lots of it by men.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Yes, men are often shallow, sex-driven automatons.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š No doubt about it.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Men are jerks.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The thing is , in my experience WOMEN ARE JUST AS BAD.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I'm not whining or complaining.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I think we have a real crisis in this society.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Men and women are both so selfish nowadays, that it's a wonder that the human race even continues.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

Men are shallow about sex and other things.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Women are shallow about finding some idiot who has a six figure income and other things.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And then both are surprised when relationships built on these things crumble into dust.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š As a man, I have had very similar experiences with women that Jennifer describes having had with men.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I really despair of ever finding anyone sometimes.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I do find that women who have already been with the workaholic corporate VP are more often genuinely willing to find someone whom they actually like and respect.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

I really think that I would be happiest being married with someone who I could be close to.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I like the advice given by Ian on this thread.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Thanks.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Good to keep in mind.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And if monasticism is really what would be better for me in the end, then that's fine.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Well, okay, that's difficult, but is there anything worth doing in this life that isn't difficult?

Forgive me, but I think that this thread has sexist overtones.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š There's a lot of man-bashing going on here, and lots of it by men.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Yes, men are often shallow, sex-driven automatons.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š No doubt about it.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Men are jerks.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The thing is , in my experience WOMEN ARE JUST AS BAD.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I'm not whining or complaining.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I think we have a real crisis in this society.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Men and women are both so selfish nowadays, that it's a wonder that the human race even continues.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

It seems to me that both sexes have been fairly severely criticized on this thread, rather than an attack on either it seems to me to be more an indictment of our species as a whole. In spite of our claims to be rational, we seem to still be primarially governed by emotion and instinct when it comes to mating. Which does lead to a question that I have had for quite sime time, and some here have hinted at, but no one has directly addressed: if we look at all of this objectively, what Logical reason is there to put oneself through this trouble? I mean back when you needed children to help you on the farm, and eventually take care of you in your old age, and the system of the dowry might give the young couple something to help them start out in life (provided the wife's family was wealthy enough), I can understand the importance (but at this time marriages were also important enough to be arranged, LOL). But why bother in this day and age? Or am I not supposed to approach the issue from a logical standpoint?

Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry

In spite of our claims to be rational, we seem to still be primarially governed by emotion and instinct when it comes to mating. ...... Or am I not supposed to approach the issue from a logical standpoint?

"Logical"........sex? Are you kidding?

The way I see it, the "sex drive", "libido"- whatever you want to call it is a Divinely created thing which, naturally has to override rationality. If it didn't, the human species would end. Like you say, if we think "rationally" about it, very few would have children, beleiving they couldn't afford them."Man and woman, He created them...", "and they become one flesh....." . The Original Plan for humanity, I think, was "mating pairs for life" but since the Fall, this "pairing" has had to be realised sacramentally, in order to contain the very strong passion of unchastity- "better to marry than to burn" says the Divine Apostle. That's why unchastity is such a difficult passion to master. The Philokalia says that we should never attempt to argue with the demon of unchastity, because he has Nature on his side- rather, we should do as the Apostle St. Paul says and "flee from fornication". The sex drive has to be strong in order to ensure the continuity of the species. Why do we think that younger monks make thousands of prostrations, chop wood, plow fields, bake bread, prepare meals, tend lamps, tie knots and dig holes all day? Simply for the excercise?And for this reason, a Christian household does not allow unrelated men and women to be alone unchaperoned- because of God's wonderful yet, responsibility-requiring gift of sex drive.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

The way I see it, the "sex drive", "libido"- whatever you want to call it is a Divinely created thing which, naturally has to override rationality. If it didn't, the human species would end.

I suspect there is more to it than simple libido, or at least I presume that people do not simply get married inorder to fulfill some abstract moral requirement that allows them to engage in sexual intercourse. Furthermore, I believe the issue to be more complex than simple libido, otherwise the advent of birth control would have meant the end of the human species, and it clearly has not, even if it did help bring about a decreased birth rate in many countries. There seems to me to be an actual desire to procreate, which may or may not be related to the desire have sex. This desire may be stronger in women than men, though it is observable in both sexes; however, whether it is a result of biological instinct, cultural conditioning, or simply a logical and well contemplated decision, I do not know. If it is either of the latter two, however, I fear I do not fully understand the reasoning, given our current social and cultural context.

Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry

Women are shallow about finding some idiot who has a six figure income and other things. And then both are surprised when relationships built on these things crumble into dust. As a man, I have had very similar experiences with women that Jennifer describes having had with men. I really despair of ever finding anyone sometimes. I do find that women who have already been with the workaholic corporate VP are more often genuinely willing to find someone whom they actually like and respect.

I think there is a problem today with men not understanding their proper role as a provider. Women seem "shallow" when we want a man who can provide for us but I think we have a right to expect a man to have a good job. I'm not saynig what we should expect a man who's rich but a man should at least be able to support a family.

I've found that many men today (especially religious ones) are under-employed. They make a show of not wanting to "play the game" of living in our materialistic world. But it takes a certain amount of money (which we only get by playing the game) to support a family. I'm not saying that someone should take a job that they hate but we have to make compromises. My father had a good job. My grandfather had a good job. I don't understand why I can't expect a guy I go out with to also have a good job.

This is all very materialistic but a man should have his eye on being a good provider for a family. He should have good credit and be thinking about buying a home. I can do these things on my own but these things are part of the man's proper role. If I'm the primary wage-earner in the family then I can't have a bunch of children. If a couple can be open to having as many children as God wants them to have, the man should be the primary breadwinner.

Furthermore, I've made the compromises with the world to have a good job so why can't I expect my partner to also do that? I don't hate my job. I like it but I wouldn't do it if they didn't pay me.

I think there's an attitude amongst religious people (men mostly because women are more practical) that if we're religious, we should live this kind of otherworldly existence where we don't deal with boring things like making the mortgage payment. Where we don't have to deal with "secular" things and can have some mythical 'religious' job of serving mankind, etc. etc. etc. I've met my share of do-gooder men, who work for Catholic Charities or for the Church, making a pittance. This will sound sexist, but those are 'wife' jobs. They are second income jobs. If I marry the religious education director, making $30K a year with crappy benefits, I have to keep my job. My job will make the mortgage payment and pay for healthcare.

I cannot stress enough the attractiveness of a good job in a man. I'm not saying you have to be a doctor and have a six figure income (although that's nice), but have a job where maybe you could support a family without requring a second income.

At the very least, be employed to your full potential. It's a sign of maturity, IMHO. Be planning financially for how you'll support a family.

If you want to find a rich man, good, you can probably do that (well, upper-middle class anyway), if you want to find a pious man, great, you can probably do that too. But if you want both, you're probably asking a bit much, the percentage of the Population that is well to do is relatively low, and the percentage of the population that is pious is relatively low, the percentage that is both would probably be no more than the product of the two, and probably substantially less.

But rest assured, the fact that pious people tend to be less concerned about money is not because of some monastic ideal about poverty, but rather it has to do with priorities. This is not only true of Religious people, but also of many Musicians, Artists, Academics, et cetera. I had a computer science professor in undergraduate School who was probably making about 70k a year, and had turned down a number of offers from large corporations offering to pay him several hundred thousand a year, with even larger signing bonuses. Why? quite simply because the corporations would not allow him the liberty to pursue the particular area of research he had devoted his life to...while money for his project may have been a high priority, his personal pay was meaningless to him. I seem to recall a verse along the lines of 'where your treasure is, there your heart will be also;' if one's highest priority is spirituality, music, art, knowledge, et cetera that is most likely where they will excel, and it's not that money is not desired, just that it's not important, and hence ends up being an afterthought.

I've met my share of do-gooder men, who work for Catholic Charities or for the Church, making a pittance. This will sound sexist, but those are 'wife' jobs. They are second income jobs. If I marry the religious education director, making $30K a year with crappy benefits, I have to keep my job.

Second income jobs? Ah, yes, of course, we're supposed to give the first fruits of our labour to our 401K, and God can have what's left over, if we don't have more important things to do.

Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry

Second income jobs? Ah, yes, of course, we're supposed to give the first fruits of our labour to our 401K, and God can have what's left over, if we don't have more important things to do.

You know very well that was a deliberate misconstruction of what she said. You can't provide for a wife and children on a single income of $30k a year. Her statement had nothing at all to do with getting rich and you know that.

Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great

I don't mind working but realize that it's difficult (if not impossible) to be the primary wage-earner in the family and be the mother. I think what I want, and what most of of my female friends want, is a man who has a good job that would allow us to take some time off when the children are young.

Quote

If you want to find a rich man, good, you can probably do that (well, upper-middle class anyway), if you want to find a pious man, great, you can probably do that too. But if you want both, you're probably asking a bit much, the percentage of the Population that is well to do is relatively low, and the percentage of the population that is pious is relatively low, the percentage that is both would probably be no more than the product of the two, and probably substantially less.

I said I wanted to find a man with a "good job" not a rich man. A "good job" allows a family to own a home. That provides good health and dental insurance. And there are many pious men out there who go to "good" non-religious jobs every morning. Being a good family man, as a good religous man should be, means that one can't be completely career driven. But one can be a good pious Orthodox Christian and be an accoutant for 9 hours a day.

Quote

But rest assured, the fact that pious people tend to be less concerned about money is not because of some monastic ideal about poverty, but rather it has to do with priorities. This is not only true of Religious people, but also of many Musicians, Artists, Academics, et cetera. I had a computer science professor in undergraduate School who was probably making about 70k a year, and had turned down a number of offers from large corporations offering to pay him several hundred thousand a year, with even larger signing bonuses. Why? quite simply because the corporations would not allow him the liberty to pursue the particular area of research he had devoted his life to...while money for his project may have been a high priority, his personal pay was meaningless to him. I seem to recall a verse along the lines of 'where your treasure is, there your heart will be also;' if one's highest priority is spirituality, music, art, knowledge, et cetera that is most likely where they will excel, and it's not that money is not desired, just that it's not important, and hence ends up being an afterthought.

Being "less" concerned about money is a good thing, however one must some concern about money. Money is a necessary evil in this world. Housing costs money. Food costs money. Healthcare costs money.

Your computer science professor example illustrates the point exactly. He sounds very sensible. That sounds like a "good job." It's enough to provide the necessities for the family. It would be enough so that the wife could stay home with the baby. One doesn't need to make six figures to have a "good job."

Quote

Second income jobs? Ah, yes, of course, we're supposed to give the first fruits of our labour to our 401K, and God can have what's left over, if we don't have more important things to do.

Oh please. That's not what I meant and you know it. A job that pays $25K a year is not enough to support a family. Someone with such a job would need to have a spouse who made at least double that to buy a house and feed the kids, etc. So it's a "second-income" job.

I have much more respect for a guy who accepts his role as a provider and goes to work every morning to a job he doesn't love (but still likes) and shows up to liturgy too than for a guy who's scared of the "secular" world and therefore either forfeits having a family or forces his family to live in poverty or forces his wife to support and his children. I'm firmly convinced that the average man is called to be a husband and a father and therefore called to provide for his wife and children. That means he might be have to be <gasp> an accountant or a pharmacist.

It's all very simple for me...my father had a good job so IMHO it's not too much to expect every guy to also have a good job. My dad, like your acquaintance, was a professor. He choose that profession so he'd have time for his family. But he made enough for my parents to own a home and put food on the table. To get vaccinations for the kids and visits to the doctor and the dentist. He didn't make as much as he could have made but he realized that being a grown up man and a husbad and father required some sacrfiices, namely not doing exactly what he wanted to do as a profession.

You know very well that was a deliberate misconstruction of what she said.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š You can't provide for a wife and children on a single income of $30k a year.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Her statement had nothing at all to do with getting rich and you know that.

30k a year is more than the per capita GDP of the UK, where the cost of living is substantially higher than here. It's far from impossible to live on. Difficult? yes, but not impossible. My statement was really about priorities, like the rest of my post. If your priority is not a high standard of living, this wage is feasible. This is not to say that such a situation is ideal, after all I'm the one who's been attacked for arguing that priests should be paid a living wage, but there is nothing wrong with someone taking a poor paying job if it is what they want to do. Now, if you're someone of the opposite sex looking for a spouse, and you have different priorities, then look elsewhere for a spouse, but there is nothing wrong with what this person has chosen to do; rather it is actually something that should be regarded as commendable.

I don't mind working but realize that it's difficult (if not impossible) to be the primary wage-earner in the family and be the mother. I think what I want, and what most of of my female friends want, is a man who has a good job that would allow us to take some time off when the children are young.

And yet many people do it. This is ultimately about your vision about the ideal way to raise your children, mother stays home and father works, the traditional model, which is not the reality for many, if not most, American households today. There's nothing wrong with this vision, but not everyone will share it, in looking for a spouse look for someone who has similar views on such things. That's not to say that those who maintain different views are wrong, just not compatable.

Quote

I said I wanted to find a man with a "good job" not a rich man. A "good job" allows a family to own a home. That provides good health and dental insurance. And there are many pious men out there who go to "good" non-religious jobs every morning. Being a good family man, as a good religous man should be, means that one can't be completely career driven. But one can be a good pious Orthodox Christian and be an accoutant for 9 hours a day.

I don't think you're going to find many 'pious' Orthodox men out there period, whether they have good jobs or not, not in modern America. However, I certainly hope you find the guy you're looking for, and there are probably a few of them out there. Just dont expect everyone to have the same priorities.

Quote

Oh please. That's not what I meant and you know it. A job that pays $25K a year is not enough to support a family. Someone with such a job would need to have a spouse who made at least double that to buy a house and feed the kids, etc. So it's a "second-income" job.

I thought it was $30k? Anyway, what I wrote to Veniamin still applies.

Quote

I have much more respect for a guy who accepts his role as a provider and goes to work every morning to a job he doesn't love (but still likes) and shows up to liturgy too than for a guy who's scared of the "secular" world and therefore either forfeits having a family or forces his family to live in poverty or forces his wife to support and his children. I'm firmly convinced that the average man is called to be a husband and a father and therefore called to provide for his wife and children. That means he might be have to be <gasp> an accountant or a pharmacist.

And I firmly believe that everyone is more capable of determining their calling than either your or I. And where do you get this notion of being 'scared' of the secular world? I doubt anyone's scared of it, it may just not interest them. Personally it's not so much the secular world, as the corporate world, that I simply cannot stand; the very concept that one area of research is preferable to another area simply because it's more lucrative is absurd and repugnant, and I would not want to work under those conditions. I'd much rather work for say a University or a Government Lab, even if it meant making substantially less. As far as working as an accountant, I'd rather starve; but that's just my personal view of the field. Concerning whether one has a family, their standard of living, and who supports it, that's personal preference. I have a friend who's father stayed home with him and his brother when they were younger because he (an electrical engineer) could work at home and their mother (a doctor) did not want to quit her job as a department head at a local hospital. Personally, I don't particularly want to have a family and I doubt my choice of career would have a substantial impact on this.

Quote

It's all very simple for me...my father had a good job so IMHO it's not too much to expect every guy to also have a good job. My dad, like your acquaintance, was a professor. He choose that profession so he'd have time for his family. But he made enough for my parents to own a home and put food on the table. To get vaccinations for the kids and visits to the doctor and the dentist. He didn't make as much as he could have made but he realized that being a grown up man and a husbad and father required some sacrfiices, namely not doing exactly what he wanted to do as a profession.

Great, that's what you're looking for in a man and I hope you find it, but not everyone has the same priorities...which has been the point of all these ramblings of mine.

Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry

Jennifer, I can understand your concerns, however I feel that your priorities are NOT in order. I am a stay at home Mother currently but will go back to work to help the family financially when both the children are in school. But first things first. You must meet a man whom you love and respect. When I met my husband I wanted to get to know him as a person. In my dating years (including my husband) I never discriminated against guys who didn't have "good " jobs or weren't ambitious. At this point you should not be worrying about such things. God's will be done. Meeting someone, falling in love and growing in love and respect for each other is a blessed thing. It seems that you are jumping the gun here. Let me also say that I met my husband in my late twenties and didn't get married until I was 35. He is somewhat of an artist and got his degree in Old English....not very useful for a career. However, we both wanted to have children (well, I wanted to sooner bec/ I am 5 yrs older than him)...so we had to decide then how the children would be cared for. We both agreed that we would rather be "poor" on one salary....so I could take care of the children....instead of having them brought up in daycare. Besides, children are only that for such a short and precious time. Fortunately, my husband was able to move up a bit at his place of employment so we can live adequately. I am sorry to ramble on here but the point I am trying to make is this: Try not to be so bitter about Men. Loving a man is a wonderful thing. I don't want to sound too romantic but your messages strike me as devoid of compassion and love. Try not to worry. Relax and enjoy all the good things in life you have right NOW. And who knows, your man may be just around the corner. Please forgive me if I have offended. I truly hope you will find happiness. Life is short here on earth, and we all have such different lives. Thank the Lord for all his mercies and blessings! It helps me sometimes to put things in perspective when I think about how selfish my complaints are when so many others suffer in this world. It is a wonderous and beautiful thing to have a husband and children to share your life here in this world. But in the end we all stand alone to face our Lord Jesus Christ. Sorry if this sounds bleak to you.

One of my close friends is a family with 4 (elem-college) kids who lives on less than 15K a year plus donations of material goods that I'm sure people probably do give them all the time (we donated a car to the "church" who donated it to them for us and everyone got the tax write off). They're one of the happiest families I know.

You can live on a LOT less than you think, if you are willing to accept a certain standard of things, like cars you fix yourself and not living in the prettiest house.

PS the mother of the aforementioned family, while occasionally substitute teaching, spent the majority of her children's childhoods staying at home and homeschooling them. Not having your kids in competition with the Joneses in public school can help keep costs down too.

One of my close friends is a family with 4 (elem-college) kids who lives on less than 15K a year plus donations of material goods that I'm sure people probably do give them all the time (we donated a car to the "church" who donated it to them for us and everyone got the tax write off). They're one of the happiest families I know.

You can live on a LOT less than you think, if you are willing to accept a certain standard of things, like cars you fix yourself and not living in the prettiest house.

But they have to rely on other people for charity. I don't think there's something wrong with my "priorities" in not wanting to have to rely upon the charity of others. Of course we never know what will happen in the future but I'd rather not plan on needing to receive charitable donations.

As someone who spent 3 years in graduate school and several months unemployed, I know all about pinching pennies. But those hard times also taught me that you need a certain amount of money. It doesn't have to be a lot. I don't want to have to worry about getting calls from the Visa people. I don't want to have to worry about using my credit card at the grocery store and it being declined. I don't want to have to worry about the power or the telephone being turned off.

Nor can I give an answer to the same question, were it posed, about women.

The original post appear to look at the behaviour of one individual and then generalise it onto all men. Were I to do this in relation to women, people of colour, people with disabilities, etc., I would get tackled about my 'xxxxist' views, I suspect.

The so-called 'battle' of the sexes is boring. One is different from the other, and not just physically. Some appear to want appear and behave in an androgynous manner, which I for one find puzzling.